Posted on 06/19/2005 8:37:21 AM PDT by Sun
I just heard on WABC radio news that the candidates that President Bush is considering as U.S. Supreme Court nominees are John Roberts, J. Michael Luttig and possibly Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales.
Alberto Gonzeles is not pro-life, which worries me.
Calling pro-life, conservative talk shows would help, as well.
Pure spin and irrelevancy.
Was their source a European re-typed memo? or was it from Abilene?
how do we know Gonzales is not pro-life? How do you know Rhenquist is?
Actual0yl it doesnt matter what his personal views are.
I would prefer a pro-abortion justice that follows the law and overturns ROE.
Conidering all the Radicals appointed to the SCOTUS by Bush I, Reagan, Nixon and Eisenhower, it stands to reason Bush II will continue the tradition.
You are basing your opinion on a decision he made based on the law. I do not have a clue if he is pro choice or pro life.
The info came straight from Lucy Ramirez
Sadly, Judges no longer consider the actual law and simply issue opinions.
Now, they consult their own personal opinions and issue orders.
I agree with you and everything, but we will have Civil War II before liberals will give up their "right" to kill unborn children. It's what they live for.
Breaking News?
The only sure thing about who is selected to fill any vacancy on the court is the fact that he/she will continue the tradition of maximizing the damage to America.
My personal choice would be Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS and even chief SCOTUS:
Private property, already an endangered species in California, is now entirely extinct in San Francisco.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
We no longer find slavery abhorrent. We embrace it. We demand more. Big government is not just the opiate of the masses. It is the opiate. The drug of choice for multinational corporations and single moms; for regulated industries and rugged Midwestern farmers and militant senior citizens.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
The quixotic desire to do good, be universally fair and make everybody happy is understandable. Indeed, the majority's zeal is more than a little endearing. There is only one problem with this approach. We are a court.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size when its failures increase.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
The public school system is already so beleaguered by bureaucracy; so cowed by the demands of due process; so overwhelmed with faddish curricula that its educational purpose is almost an afterthought.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
" agree with you and everything, but we will have Civil War II before liberals will give up their "right" to kill unborn children. It's what they live for."
If the pro-aborts fight harder for death, than the good guys do for life, death will win and continue to win.
Please contact the White House.
"Breaking News?"
I just heard it and was surprised that President Bush would even consider Gonzales. Why did we fight so hard to get Bush reelected?
As the Specter endorsement indicated, pro-politics trumps pro-life. However we can hope that, at the moment-of-truth, President Bush will choose a confirmed pro-lifer.
I know I know. You're right. I'm just saying that the left worships abortion and they won't give it up for anything. I'll still fight for the unborn's right-to-life until the day I day, but I recognize the zealotry of the other side. They love abortion.
"My personal choice would be Janice Rogers Brown for SCOTUS and even chief SCOTUS:"
She would be my personal choice, as well, and thanks for giving us even more reasons why she is a great choice.
We could suggest her name to the president, and frankly, I was shocked that she wasn't one of the names mentioned.
Here's an excerpt of an article that I found about Gonzales:
To view this excerpt online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41386
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
CHANGING OF THE GUARD
Pro-lifers not thrilled
with Gonzales choice
Bush's pick for attorney general upheld abortion on Texas court
Pro-life activists are criticizing President Bush's choice of Alberto Gonzales to replace John Ashcroft as attorney general, worrying the White House counsel will not aggressively uphold the administration's anti-abortion stance.
Gonzales is a former member of the Texas Supreme Court, where he voted to allow a teenager to get an abortion without notifying her parents, circumventing the notification law in that state. At the time he criticized the position taken by his colleague on the court, Priscilla Owen, who voted against allowing the abortion. Gonzales said dissenting from his majority opinion "would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism."
His comments later were used by Democrats in the U.S. Senate who blocked Owen's confirmation to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Chuck Baldwin, a pastor and columnist, slammed Gonzales, citing the Texas case and stating, "Gonzales is anything but pro-life." (excerpt)
I am concerned about his upholding ROE, not whether he is pro-life or pro-choice.
Dont you think many personally pro-life judges have voted to uphold abortion laws becasue they were tied by ROE.
Again what make you think Rhenquist is pro-life? Maybe he is pro-choice but understands the role of the judiciary.
Ping
"...They love abortion...."
Got that right!! And unfortunately, with this country divided as evenly as it is right now, IMO there is NO WAY Roe will be overturned, NO WAY...
My dad died a few years ago from cancer and I can remember one of the things he said about his disease... He said there was no doubt that there is a cure for cancer out there already, no doubt at all. But, there is SO MUCH financial liability equated to it in this country, that the news of a cure would need to come out of the Far East or someplace like that. There is too much at stake...
I think the same rings true in overturning Roe v. Wade, it may not be as much a financial liability as the other, but I think the overturning would create extreme consequence. Now, before anyone jumps ugly with me.... I'm 100% on the side of I don't care, extreme consequence or not, I want it overturned. I just don't think it ever will be regardless of who is on the SCOTUS...
I feel that pro-lifers have integrity and are basically honest, and will abide by the original Constitution. Of course, and sadly, it won't happen overnight.
Gonzales is against torture unless it was Terri Schiavo. Alberto Gonzalez cannot be trusted imo.
Gonzales is not pro-life.
IMHO
bush will nominate only judges that can be CONTROLLED.
Pro-Life, Pro-Abortion, Pro-NWO, - it doesn't matter.
It's about power.
and control
it doesnt matter, what does he think or ROE.
Do you know for a fact Rhenquist is pro-life?
I agree completely and in fact had this conversation earlier today. A "cure" would ruin the livlihoods of too many people.
The same is true about the abortion industry, even on the pro-life side.
Coleus,Bump.
Wow! those quotes are great! thanks for posting them. I didn't realize she was such a solid intellectual. I had suggested her for the scotus because it would make the Dems insane: how can they possibly oppose a black woman for the Court after they just voted her fit for the Court of Appeals? She's better than I thought.
I would want her for SCOTUS and chief SCOTUS if she were a white man.
The fact that she is a black women will, of course, cause coniptions on the left, an added bonus, but not any reason for Conservatives/Libertarians, who (supposedly) operate on the prinicples of equality and ability, to choose her over any other.
This, I think, is exactly how she would see it too.
The Washington Post called her a 'right wing' judicial activist in an editorial.
Good. It's about time.
We need to run Janice Rogers Brown for President. Those quotations read as if they had been uttered by Ronald Reagan.
---Con[s]idering all the Radicals appointed to the SCOTUS by Bush I, Reagan, Nixon and Eisenhower, it stands to reason Bush II will continue the tradition.---
I sadly but wholeheartedly concur. As in the original comments by Deep Throat to Woodward and Bernstein, if you want to understand this, "Follow the money." The abortion industry rakes in millions, is largely unregulated (one needs more permission to have a tonsil removed than a child exterminated), and we don't know what is done with the "byproducts of the process."
One day, a bright tort lawyer is going to make a ton of money suing those who offer this procedure in a mammoth class action suit.
Frank
She won't be confirmed without the nuke option, but she would be the best choice because there is not much out there.
And the Senate actually confirmed her with a majority (more than 60) (albeit after four years of heated debate). Yep, she's the one.
Chuck Baldwin, a pastor and columnist, slammed Gonzales, citing the Texas case and stating, "Gonzales is anything but pro-life." (excerpt)
In any event, Rehnquist will most likely resign at the end of this month, so it won't hurt to contact the president, and tell him to select a STRONG pro-life U.S. Supreme Court nominee.
This is our chance to EVENTUALLY overturn Roe.
Please do a search about Gonzales, and you will see what I mean.
Please do a search about Gonzales, and you will see what I mean.
Enlighten me.
Enlighten me.
I couldn't find it.
Thank you. I'll read it tomorrow as I have to get up at 4 a.m.
Thank you. I'll read it tomorrow as I have to get up at 4 a.m.
Good morning, early morning blurry-eyed bump.
This is being discussed in the News forum: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1425923/posts
Short version: Gonzales is on certain pro-lifers' s**t list because he applied the Texas parental consent law as written, not as those particular pro-lifers wished it had been written.
If interested, please see post #44. Here's an excerpt from the link:
"F. Respecting the Rule of Law
The United States Supreme Court has observed that abortion is a divisive and highly-charged issue. See Casey, 505 U.S. at 866, 869. Thus, we recognize that judges' personal views may inspire inflammatory and irresponsible rhetoric. Nevertheless, the issue's highly-charged nature does not excuse judges who impose their own personal convictions into what must be a strictly legal inquiry. We might personally prefer, as citizens and parents, that a minor honor her parents' right to be involved in such a profound decision. But the Legislature has said that Doe may consent to an abortion without notifying her parents if she demonstrates that she is mature and sufficiently well informed. As judges, we cannot ignore the statute or the record before us. Whatever our personal feelings may be, we must "respect the rule of law." Casey, 505 U.S. at 868."
I don't like the fact that the COURTS decide if a minor is mature, or not anyway, and more so, when it results in the death of an innocent pre-born baby, as I am pro-life.
It seems as if "Big Brother" is raising America's children more and more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.